Lab Testing.

[michaelscott]

Hard to relax with that coffee in me but I will try.

 

As I stated before, I am pretty ignorant when it comes to the chemistry and am here to learn, not to accuse yet another member of being a dirty capitalist with bad intentions.

[Restorium2]

I don't see how you could make that claim without testing. And you lecture me.

Read what I write instead of what you want to read. I said the results vary with the same oil. The results vary patient to patient with the same oil. I didn't have to test for CBD to know that it's the same with all patients tested because I used the same oil, therefore the same amount of CBD gave patients a totally different result. The medical results depend on the patient more than a lab test for CBD.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Restorium2

[Northern Lab]

Are you willing to think about the possibility that reducing the THC and increasing the CBD in a cancer treatment might decrease its efficacy overall, while perhaps accomplishing the goal of getting someone "less high?" From what I understand about these high-dosage, long-duration treatments, the "high" effect only lasts for a few days while ramping up to the required dosage.

 

Yes. I think about it all the time. Just because the THC isn't getting you high as a kite doesn't mean it's not still working against cancer.

[Restorium2]

Not just that, but another oil with similar CBD content will not likely have the same effect unless it also has similar amounts of the other cannabinoids, and terpenes. In addition, many of the strains being tested right now have nearly identical cannabinoid profiles (most labs in Michigan cannot even test for a wide array of terpenes at this time) and completely different effects.

Right. This is what totally limits labs. And you see labs and dispensaries saying things that go directly against this. Then I find a prominent lab guy that advises to skew the results to get the placebo effect because it makes people happy even if it's a placebo. Then you see CBD determination is a 5 billion dollar industry. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what's going on here.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Restorium2

[Northern Lab]

Read what I write instead of what you want to read. I said the results vary with the same oil. The results vary patient to patient with the same oil. I didn't have to test for CBD to know that it's the same with all patients tested because I used the same oil, therefore the same amount of CBD gave patients a totally different result. The medical results depend on the patient more than a lab test for CBD.

 

Well, to be fair, you're not exactly conducting a scientific study. Do all these patients have the same ailments? What are their ages? Diets? Gender?

 

Too many variables there to really make any sort of judgement at all about CBD, THC, and terpene content.

 

No one is arguing against the fact that different patients experience different effects based on all sorts of external and internal factors.

 

 

 

Not just that, but another oil with similar CBD content will not likely have the same effect unless it also has similar amounts of the other cannabinoids, and terpenes. In addition, many of the strains being tested right now have nearly identical cannabinoid profiles (most labs in Michigan cannot even test for a wide array of terpenes at this time) and completely different effects.

 

The bold is flat out wrong, Chad. Cannabinoid profiles vary greatly from strain to strain. I've seen THC to CBD ratios from 1:100 to 100+:1.

[Northern Lab]

The fact that you refer to the ratio does indicate that you are viewing it as a THC antagonist rather than a medicinal compound in itself. Are you really implying that the differences between these strains is this ratio? I know you know better than that.

 

Why can't it be both an antagonist and a medicinal compound at the same time?

 

Yes, cannabinoid ratios are one way to differentiate between strains, but it's obviously not the ONLY way.

[peanutbutter]

I am also highly skeptical of this, since THC has been identified as the main tumor-shrinking agent in cannabis.

 

It is limited without other substances.

 

I was contacted by the dispensary that noticed a strain with 15% CBD content.

 

I then used that bud to make my high CBD RSO for my own cancer. The tumor was not able to be detected after 14 days of using this high CBD oil.

 

When THC and CBD are used at the same time, you get the cocktail effect. That's why Marinol has NOT been noticed to reduce tumors. No supporting compounds.

[peanutbutter]

If this is indeed the case, and I believe it likely is, the patient will know.

 

No they will not. Not without the material being tested.

 

Believe me .. I would have been passing out high CBD clones much sooner if that were the case.

 

The high tech people have been trying to take advantage of CBD for about ten years. The main problem was identifying a high CBD plant. .. no testing available.

 

Without testing, it's a guess.

Edited November 19, 2012 by peanutbutter

[peanutbutter]

I get that explanation, but wouldn't a person have to take more of the CBD-rich oil to get the same amount of THC if half of it were replaced by CBD?

 

Therapeutic dosage levels for THC is 10mg/kg and 5mg/kg for CBD.

 

Round numbers .. say a 100kg human would need 1000mg THC to cross that threshold and 500mg of CBD.

 

You can eat 10,000 mg of THC as a starting dose .. as long as it hasn't been decarboxalated.

 

If a newbee patient was about to eat ten grams of THC, I would double check to make sure it isn't already decarbed.

[peanutbutter]

It is not a guess for the patient relieving a condition. They are not the "high-tech people" but they know what works and what doesn't.

 

That's like working on a cancer without any imaging equipment.

[peanutbutter]

People here are arguing in favor if keeping all cannabis consumers in the dark.

 

Is this medicine or a party?

[Restorium2]

What we need to do is find medical strains, not high CBD strains. We use patients to decide which strains work, not labs. You don't LAB test a strain and go BINGO this one is medical.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Restorium2

[Northern Lab]

What we need to do is find medical strains, not high CBD strains. We use patients to decide which strains work, not labs. You don't LAB test a strain and go BINGO this one is medical.

 

How do 'we' decide which strains 'work'? What is the definition of 'work'? That it works for a dozen people, a hundred, two?

 

IMO, all cannabis has medical potential, regardless of the terpene content, cannabinoid ratio, etc. Deciding what 'works' and doesn't for patients isn't anyone's job but the patient. All we are here to do is try to provide information that can help a patient look for similar traits in other strains.

[knucklehead bob]

What we need to do is find medical strains, not high CBD strains. We use patients to decide which strains work, not labs. You don't LAB test a strain and go BINGO this one is medical.

Yes indeed . When you find what works for a person and the condition they are trying to alleviate , then is the time for testing to determine what is in that particular strain that is alleviating that patients condition .

[peanutbutter]

You don't LAB test a strain and go BINGO this one is medical.

 

I did.

 

So there are no medical properties for CBD?

 

I guess we need to teach people that scientists and medical researchers are wrong. That all we need is for you to take a puff and pronounce your determination.

[knucklehead bob]

I did.

 

So there are no medical properties for CBD?

 

I guess we need to teach people that scientists and medical researchers are wrong. That all we need is for you to take a puff and pronounce your determination.

Where did any one say that ?

[Nemosity]

Testing is a tool; just like a hammer. It could be used to identify particular strains that a patient finds works best for them. Or it could be used for bs and whatever. I could drive a nail with a hammer and build a house; or I could smash stuff with it. Let's not beat anyone up here, it's all new we are figuring this out together. Let's find the best use for it and be happy we are up and around to even have this discussion.

[SFC]

Not to attack you personally PB but how many time can that same tumor of yours disappear?

[Northern Lab]

If this is indeed true, then the whole "CBD-rich plant hunt" is even more of a waste of time. Apparently you would need one cultivar that can produce all or mostly CBD (of which there are already several in state), then use it as an additive. That is actually what GW Pharmaceuticals decided to do after their research. Interesting.

 

It's not wise to limit ourselves to one cultivar of CBD rich cannabis just like it's not wise to limit ourselves to one cultivar of THC rich cannabis. Or one cultivar with a specific ratio, Or one cultivar with a specific terpene profile.

 

Diversity is king.

[t-pain]

well, its good to know if you are getting something with thc in it, or just hemp with 1%thc.

[mibrains]

seems to me...

 

both sides of this quandary are correct here...

 

we need patient feedback with massive databases.

 

also we need each and every plant tested to find the true genetic information that helps map a path to any particular cure.

 

which is to say....

can u imagine if we would have listened 20 years ago to the naysayers about genetic testing and gene sequencing?

 

it is a young science yes...

that's true

to be fair and more potentially accurate.. if you were to preform a test where each plant (usable portion only of course) is ground up in its entirety and then a sample taken from the mixture it would most likely produce much more consistent results.

that's how we should probably be delivering and using it anyways..

 

everyone tends to want pretty nuggets.

 

if you grind the entire usable portion of the plant that would give a much better identification of that plant. if you were to "blend" several strains a person could come up with some very beneficial blends..

 

but it would take both patient research that has traceable feedback as well as a scientific testing profile.

 

currently our testing procedures may not be adequate however we are all in a young science. time should help...

[SFC]

That is a whole different realm of testing Bri. But truthfully I would rather know a plants DNA sequence and history if a database could be compiled than how much THC/CBD it has. Genetics has always been the thing we are about.

[HEMP4LIFE]

testing for sure has its place, so northren lab guy youre in.

patient sampeling of strains by smoke could be a indicator of THC content but from my experience during ingesting you are able to feel the full effects of the elements of mmj during that ingestion peroid which lasts for me about 2-5 days.

stop ingesting and 2-5 days later pain and swelling starts over again, while just smoking wont really take the full pain away.

smoking has its place for me with the mind.

im not a doctor but for what my professional opinion is worth, we need to keep changing strains to gain full thearpy from the elements of mmj.

just as a psycosis paitent needs to constantly have their meds changed to keep psycosis under control.

our bodys have a way of adapting to elements put inside our systems so change of foods, routines, meds and mmj is esseintal to the full effects of thearpy.

from a patient perspective i like the caregiver model, i wouldnt like the commericalization of mmj, although i do like the dispencery being their if needed.

as a paitent i like the fact that the northren lab guy is testing. as a business man i feel these things will work out in time but i would like the laws to remain as written because its taylored to small business/caregiver/grower. not to the big pharma and corprate greed with goverment regulation. oh i did mention greed?

because that is what will probably happen if we ask for more laws.

[SFC]

Hemp4life. Some strains really do lose effect over a period of time but some never do. If you are happy and feel better frequently changing strains hey, more power to you. I think most patients that are using for specific ailments are further to stick with a strain that is working as long as it is still working. Each major strain has its own individual characteristics, an already nervous or paranoid person does not benefit from a high anxiety strain. A person that needs to stay energetic would not benefit from experimenting with couchlock indicas.

[HEMP4LIFE]

SFC

i do feel that changing is good and during those changes i find that i can self medicate as needed for a paticular mood or injury, by keep my smoked strains seperated. as for oils my darker oil seems to help pain with less high but the amber red oil seems to really make me feel higher it was made from all the same plant materials but just filtered less and the darker stuff was of the second wash

dose that make sense